@BRUTUALTRUTH don't bother with him Tories in every country even mine (Australia) can never past the end of their own wallet or their own massive ego's for that matter.
@mcconvilleme I was under the impression that the soldiers won the waf., That fat cigar chomping tosser did fuck all and CLEMENT ATLEE was hid deputy. Also he was wrong on India , wrong to oppose the wekfare state, wrong on rights for women.
@BRUTUALTRUTH Clement Atlee was nothing. He was a nobody as a Deputy and he was economically inept when he did take office.
He didn't oppose the welfare state - if he did, he would have reversed it when he got back in office. (But if he did oppose it, he wouldn't have been wrong).
You seem to be trying to attract attention with controversial views. He stopped the annoyingly large forces that wanted to cut a deal out of the war, and gave the country the morale that took us through.
@mcconvilleme You a typical Tory red neck or what? If that fat bastard was such a brillant leader why did the Britrish people fuck him out in thr 1945 election? When he retuned to power in 1951 he got a MILLION VOTES LESS than Labour thanks to the daft voting system.
The Tory Tosser also wanted to re-invade Ireland as the fat cunt was paranoid.
If you end up seriously injured an might die remembet that the care you receive in a NHS hospital was a Labour invention by Clement Atlee!
"red neck" is an Americanism - we don't really have them in England. But I'm not poor, so I'm certainly not a 'red neck'.
He was kicked out of office in 45 because he was terrible at the politics game. He was too complacent about the victory in WW2 and didn't bother with a campaign. He was the best crisis leader our country has ever had; but when there was no crisis, he had no idea what to do.
What Churchill did for our country goes beyond political boundaries, partisan divisions weren't relevant, that was the point of the national government. I think you need to stop being so strictly partisan about things, recognise that politicians on both sides of the house can do things well
If I ever ended up seriously injured, you couldn't pay me enter an NHS hospital - I don't like the thought of infection.
Plus, I believe it was Bevan who invented the NHS, not Clem.
@BRUTUALTRUTH i'm americna and sometimes i wish my family has stayed in alsace i'd say france but they are adament theyre germans i hate to tell them theyre french theyll have a stroke , the united states is now a nation of adolescent sociopaths a nation of drunken spoiled 15 years olds waving a gun in the worlds face..i'm ashamed of what we have become..we werent always this selfish
@RichardElden People like pipoo define the cancerous essence of Thatcherism, no regard or esteem for human life. Attlee's government realised monumental achievements. He will be long remembered....you won't
@RichardElden People like pipoo1 define the cancerous values espoused by Thatcher's government which has spread like rabies eating away at the fabric of society. Attlee's government made monumental achievements, giving dignity to people long disregarded by a privelaged Tory ruling class. He'll be long remembered....you won't....good riddance
People didn't have short memories in 1945 as they do now and didn't vote on personality rather than policy back then. Also Churchill was a good wartime leader but not very good domestically hence the big defeat. Also the conservative party at the time had caused alot of problems prior to 1939 with the economy and depression before it.
@allyplumb and the fact that he forcibly attained essentially a one party coalition and suspended the elections, hell even as Japan was bombing us here in Australia we still held elections as a matter of fact we held 2 during the war one resulting in a hung parliament and the other a landslide where Labor had more than 2/3 of the house under their control
@RichardElden thats not only incredibly stupid, it would bankrupt the UK and you'd be faced with a healthcare crisis, you are like most right-wingers, willing to privatise most major industries and sack the public service which is great for making a small amount of money fast but it will in the long run not work.
@RichardElden the welfare state exists for a reason, without it the country would be bankrupted because the health system would collapse, the education system would be rendered useless. The UK needed this in 1945, we've had an adequate welfare state here since Federation without it disease would've killed more people than it did, my country probably would've descended in civil war, it exists for a reason no matter how much you hate it.
@RichardElden Open to debate. He certainly knew how to end the Cold War. However I doubt he could stand in todays Republican Party. Federal Spending under his tenure increased at unprecedented levels.
@RichardElden Mrs Thatcher held him in the very highest regard. Of all the Prime Ministers we ever had only two ever left the nation better off than they found it. Attlee and Thatcher, and oddly enough they are the two that top the surveys on this question.
One of the most curious things about Churchill is that he NEVER won the popular vote at any General Election. Attlee beat him all three times including 1951 but the electoral system at that time worked against the Labour Party.
I don't think that 1945 was a defeat for Churchill but more for his party. A lot of people by 1945 held the Conservative party in contempt for their inability to deal with the depression, appeasing Hitler and leaving Britain unprepared on the brink of war. Churchill to his credit opposed appeasement but he paid for it at the ballot box. The Conservatives have a shameful record in basically not giving a toss for ordinary people in this country. This is as true today as in 1945!
@densaner77 If you think you have it bad there in the UK, you haven't heard of the "Conservatives" we have here in the US. At least you guys have NHS, in the US, if you are poor and get sick, you die in the gutter.
The Republican ("Conservative") Party here in the US is basically a neo-fascist party that has completely handed control of our government to corporations, over the past 30 years.
@llar87. On the contrary I am well aware of the so called "Grand Old Party". You are correct that the GOP is a neo-fascist party. The Republicans are by far the most right wing party to hold office and in any western democracy. They must have a factory somewhere for the endless production of nutcases they have to speak for them. From nuts like Bachmann or Beck to other nuts like Palin to that meganut Coulter. I hate the Conservatives in my country but they are not as right wing as the GOP.
@RichardElden To George this was his chance to make his cousin look like and idiot if he really believed in the war he should've been on the frontline fighting himself, but no millions of men died for what was at times 15 yards of land.
@RichardElden got a question for you did Haig ever inspect the trenches and conditions for himself or did he true to form never leave his office in London, Monash visited our frontline troops on several occasions the first time it reduced him to tears, he even considered asking Prime Minister Hughes to withdraw the troops but he changed his mind after weighing up his influence (Gen. Monash was Jewish and so lost a lot of influence purely based on that)
@RichardElden 100,000 men dead is a huge total for a country with a population of 2.5 million. The British Army losing 58,000 men just shows how inept the leadership was and so later we were sent in as cannon fodder whilst the war stagnated.
@RichardElden how was it alright 10 million died essentially for nothing Germany lost some land, Austria-Hungary dissolved but that was it, Australia a country that should've been nowhere near the fighting lost over 100,000 men.
@irishgodfatherchris You don't know the full repercussions of the First World War. The old German Empire was splintered as you mentioned and a Republic created. Many new countries were created in Eastern Europe. The old Austro-Hungarian Empire (oldest in Europe) was toppled and split. The Ottoman Empire collapsed and the Middle-East splintered. Japan gained lots of ground in Asia, German overseas territories were parcelled out, Britain and France were weakened. The USSR was created etc etc...
@irishgodfatherchris Most of the results were bad, but they can only be under-estimated at your peril. The result of the war was to change the course of world history, for the worse.
@thebigJM92 I'm not arguing in favour of war, I'm having a go at the tory that you see above you, who claimed that the war was a good thing because Britain came out of it still a super-power, whilst over 10,000,000 as I said fought for was at times about 15 yards of land
@RichardElden once again that was Churchill's fault the man could not organise a piss-up in a pub let alone a military campaign, who the hell organises an invasion where the enemy knows your coming and already have the high-ground, medieval tacticians knew this why not Churchill. Churchill resigned because of the monumental failure of this campaign.
@RichardElden Churchill sent thousands of my countries men to die for no reason, hell this man was so delusional that he tried to re-enact the story of the 300 Spartans and replaced them with 300 Australians every single one of those men we slaughtered because the British didn't think we were worth saving nor did they think the island were were defending was worth it either
@NickB1967 What by helping sell the UK off to the rest of the world so we have to rely on Japan and chinese firms for jobs. She also helped us into Europe thanks a bunch.
@ThePAULOPABLO: As opposed to working for lame nationalised firms that produced crappy goods that no one wanted? Moreover, she was a Euroskeptic and refused to adopt the Euro. Joining the EEC came before her in 1973.
@RichardElden I'm not going to talk to you unless you demonstrate historical knowledge. By saying Churchill would have preserved our empire, you are proving to me that you know jack shit about post war Britain.
In fact, I think you'll continue like you did on your other account and just post stupid shit instead of actually thinking of factual arguments.
@RichardElden You clearly know very little about the situation. Do you honestly think that if Churchill had won in '45, we would still have an empire? That demonstrates your utter stupidity and lack of economic knowledge.
yeah getting access to healthcare housing and education can really get you down and make you wish for the good old days of no socialised services save for the police and army...
@Marnerbanana NHS and Education yes but labour never can seem to improve or defend them when they are in as of housing labour should have let private enterprise come in
@ToaJoe Because thats how the vote is done the lib Dems got 5,999,384 votes yet went down 2 seats in 1997 they got 5,242,947 yet they were up 28 seats its just politics in this country crazy results every time
Thatcher 1979
13,697,923 339 seats up 62
1983
13,012,316 387 seats up 58
And the AV votes system its funny that labour supported it yet never had a referendum now support it because labour and the Lib Dem Respectfully would get more seats but would leave the BNP to gain
@ImPoliticalOK Doesn't matter. Labour still got more votes, therefore they should have won. And yes, I agree the conservatives should have won in that election in the 60's, too.
AV is a terrible idea. Not all of labour support it, actually. Certain key figures are opposed to it, and vice versa.
@ImPoliticalOK well it could do one of two things it could consolidate the Lib Dems or it could kill them because what it would force the minor parties and indeed the major parties as well it would force them to preference other candidates on the sheet for example in my seat Labor preference the Greens, then the Socialist Alliance, then Family First, then the Liberals (Conservatives). All it does is makes sure a candidate has an absolute majority in their constituency.
@ToaJoe Also people where fed up of Labour they wanted happier times of low tax and Proper Education in schools and a sensible house building program after the war
@JuanMacready We wouldn't have been any better under any other party. If Churchill had been voted in, we'd have had to fight a war with India to retain that, which would have put us further in the red. The war would have taken years and we wouldn't have been able to afford it, and would end up conceding India anyway. We'd have fought wars all over the world to retain useless colonies, just like we did under Attlee anyway, and Churchill when he came back in 1951. Nothing would have differed.
@BillDFC Neither Thatcher or Major went to public school. Blair however, did, and Brown was just as much a member of the Scottish aristocracy as Cameron is part of the English upper classes. If you want a reason for a decline in social mobility in this country and the hegemony of the privileged within public life than look no further than the socialist Labour policy of destroying the grammar schools and replacing them with poorly performing comprehensives.
@UnitedBritannia Although I agree with your general sentiment, its stretching a point to call Brown "Scottish aristocracy". He was a very bright child who was fast-tracked into Edinburgh University, that's all. In fact, his education was more typical of a grammar school type system - he was identified at an early age (like the 11 plus), put in a hothouse environment (like a grammar school) and went onto a prestigious university.
@ToaJoe But swings and roundabouts, you can't pick and choose. Blair had a more privileged upbringing than Thatcher. The privileged upbringing thing doesn't really hold water for the Labour party when Ed Miliband comes from an upper-middle class family with a father from the academic elite!
@ToaJoe And as for the premise that in 1951 Labour should have won the general election but were stopped by the electoral system (ie they lost) it can quite as easily be said that in 2010 the Conservatives should have won an absolute majority in the general election. Because lets not forget that the Tories are now having to share power when they got 37% of the vote, whereas in 2005 the Labour party won a good absolute majority with just 36% of the vote!
@UnitedBritannia thats not quite true Thatcher attended Kesteven and Grantham Girls' School (after being awarded a scholarship and Major attended Rutlish Grammar School for one year.
@UnitedBritannia That makes no sense. Post-war Labour tried to move Britain towards becoming a classless society. Socialism, by its very nature, seeks to create equality. Hegemony only occurs when there is a ruling class to instigate it.
The Labour Party has always been a party of toffs. Tony Benn, Michael Foot, Dick Crossman, Hugh Gaitskill, Clem Attlee, Tony Blair etc all went to private schools and Oxford.
The Tories however elected in David Cameron their first toff since Alec Douglas Home. Heath, Thatcher, Major, Hague, Smith and Howard all went to state schools.
The election defeat had more to do with the fact that the Tories had been in power for a very long time, and many people had major problems with some of the stuff they did before the war. It wasn't really as much a judgement on Churchill as his approval rating after the war was sky high. We elect parties in this country, not Prime Minsters.
I'm Labour for life, but this video is a sorry example of how ill-informed and childish the British voters can be. British thinking: "We've had some bad times...it's obviously all Churchill's fault...Let's get rid of him."
It's funny, I was thinking about this event earlier today before I saw this.
It's making me worry about the fate of this election.
@miamad You don't know a fucking thing about me. Say that to my face and I'll cut your fucking throat. I work very hard ...but I am not a pretentious well-to-do arse hole like all of you southern cunts. I have the sense, unlike you, to realise not all people are poor because they don't work hard. What about single mothers?
A tip: Taking your head out of your rectum may help you notice things like this.
@IronbreakerFTW you know this has just happened here in my state, the opposition led by a man who has no clue as to how to run a political party managed an unlikely 5.96% swing and gained 13 seats to hold a two seat majority (45 to 43) purely because the public wanted change not because the Government was doing a bad job.
@bigfilmhat Yes it was odd wasn't it? Usually a good war victory is prime fodder for an incumbent PM facing re-election. Thatcher put her's to good use. In 1945 things were different; the war had exacted a terrible price from Britain in human as well as economic terms, we were basically bankrupt and many families had been shattered. People also have longer memories than politicians suppose and they remembered what happened after the Great War. I suppose people thought what was this all for?
@sonofcy The country was ruined, industry devastated and a Million men were about to return home to what? I think that they thought it was time for a change, that they had earned it in blood, sweat and tears. Also Churchill was not as popular a figure in all of the country as you might think by reading the history books. Before the war in many parts that suffered in the Depression he was disliked and in some places despised.
Clement Atlee was originally a Conservative but changed his views when working in a poor part of London. He saw the harsh conditions and wanted to change them. Unlike many politician's today he was a conviction politician who just wanted to help people.
Churchill did not lose the election. The main reasons the Conservatives were widely hated in 1945 were not really his fault. The twin evils of Appeasement (he opposed it) and reaction to the great depression (he wasn't in power) . I am glad we had Churchill to lead us through the war as he played a major part in the Victory. I am glad we had Attlee who led the country through the difficult post war years. The Conservatives lost the election in 1945 not Churchill and I for one am glad they did!
Attlee should have stood down after the 1951 defeat... and maybe Churchill a year or so after gaining power.. because both were past their best by then.... in age and health.. but as I say, Churchill was the right man to be in power in 1940 and throughout the war... Chamberlain couldn't have inspired us like he did... and Attlee was the right man from 1945 onwards... both great leaders but suited for different times and climates...
Everybody thought Churchill was going to win... Attlee himself probably did... the reason why he lost was memory of mass unemployment and poverty of the 1930's, the means test, the poor state of many soldiers when the war started, the war brought together people from different social classes together for the first time, public memory of how they were cheated after World War I, Munich and appeasement. He was popular in 1945, but his party wasn't.
This government gave us the NHS, full employment, got the country going again after World War II, because it was basically bankrupt, University grants, free school milk for children.... of course Attlee didn't get everything right. but for me, he was the greatest peacetime Prime Minister of the 20th Century...
Americans usually don't understand the parliamentary political system in the UK. We elect Parties not Prime Ministers. That was part of the reason for Churchill leaving office at that time. Mind you, nowadays it's looking more and more like we are 'electing' Prime Ministers.
Well, in 1951 the Labour Party actually had more votes than the Conservatives, but the Conservatives gained more new seats.
Though a bit different, the same thing happened in America in 2000 where Al Gore had more votes than Bush but Bush still won.
Churchill was still a great man though. He was what U.K. needed during the war, and Attlee was what U.K. needed to progress forward as a nation (health-care). Both great.
Sadly todays labour and conservatives are far from attlee and churchill
I'm not commenting that his defeat was good or bad. It just seems so unlikely that a Prime Minister or President with such a historic victory in war then gets bent over just months later.
Churchill had introduced the ID card during the war for safety reasons but promised to scrap them when the war ended. Unfortunately Labour won before the war had ended against Japan so they decided that instead of phasing out ID cards they were going to hugely increase the amount of information on them and they did. So bad did the public backlash against this authoritarianism become that the government was taken to court and was forced to back down and give up. Attlee lost to Churchill in '51
@thebigJM92 to be clear, attllee did NOT lose the popular vote to Churchill in '51, the rigged non-proportional system allowed Churchill to win because of the greater amount of seats.
Btw, Attlee gave you Brits NHS so you should respect him a bit more.
@andyx1205 NHS was the one redeeming feature of his 6 years in power. How about his massive nationalisation programme leading to the economic crises that almost destroyed the economy and certainly accelerated its decline in the 60s and 70s?
Oh and in 1974 the Conservatives won more votes and Labour more seats so Labour formed the goverrnment, its swings and roundabouts. Still now it is weighted to the Labour Parties advantage (if both won the same number of votes Labour would win easy)
@thebigJM92 If it weren't for the introduction of NHS, Great Britain today may have been like the shithole America, a small middle class with a very rich elite. You would have had no social safety net and Brits would be seen as a joke by Europeans that do have universal health-care just as how America is seen as a joke when just across their border Canadians live to be much longer and have more money in their pockets because of low priced health-care.
@andyx1205 It's obvious you feel very strongly about the issue of healthcare but i will point something out to you. After the budget for the whole welfare department (including pensions as well as benefits) the spending on the NHS is the biggest use of government funds in the country. Between 15 and 20% of the budget is spent on the NHS. Personally i don't have a problem with that, i like the NHS, but if the US was to follow that plan there would have to be DRASTIC reductions elsewhere.
@andyx1205 And if Clement Attlee himself hadn't introduced the NHS one of his Labour successors in the 1960s definitely would have done. It doesn't change the fact that he implemented the economic policies that would lead the country to the very edge of destruction and made Britain a laughing stock.
@omsct Churchill wouldn't have fought a war over India. His Cabinet, not to mention Parliament, wouldn't have let him. Britain did not run its empire like France. Don't forget it had already given India some power over its own domestic policy and had point blank PROMISED them independence. Churchill might have dragged his feet for a few years but it is clear from his Iron Curtain speech that by 1946 his main concern was Europe and the USSR.
@omsct The greatest figure in the Labour Party in the time of Attlee was Ernest Bevin, the Foreign Secretary. It was mainly thanks to his persuasion that the reluctant US agreed to set up NATO for example. In fact considering the disastrous position Britain found itself in in 1945 I think it was remarkably well handled over the next 20 years. Withdrawing from 20% of the world is no easy task when you are bankrupt, battered and thinking on your feet.
@omsct But yes i was talking about the nationalisation. Nationalisation CAN work, but only as a temporary measure. Long term nationalisation of industry WILL lead to its decline. Look at the Soviet Union. In the short term it led to a vast expansion, in the long-term it led to economic collapse. Such was happening in Britain within 30 years. 83% tax rate? You would have to be mad to pay that.
@thebigJM92 But we fought other wars all around. I appreciate that Kenya is a different case to India, and I don't understand the Palestine-Israel conflict well enough to comment, but we fought a war in Malaya for 12 years, and I'm pretty sure that India would have posed some kind of problem.
What about a limited amount of government intervention in industry - like South Korea, Japan, West Germany, and France. Some of a country's biggest companies are built up by being protected by government
@omsct Yes we fought many small wars in Empire territory but they were not wars in which Britain was aiming to hold on to the territory indefinately. In Kenya and Malaya Britain did intend to give these places independence, however it wanted to set up competent governments before it left. India's system in 1947 was far more advanced than other parts of our empire, with an efficient civil service and democratic system put in place by the Raj. We were trying to do the same in the other territories
@omsct The nationalists fighting for independence in (say) Kenya didn't accept this as an excuse for waiting for independence so they fought for it and sped up the process. When we left we hadn't achieved the nation building position we wanted. India WOULD have gained its independence before 1950 even if Churchill was PM-costs would have been too high, demands for independence too overwhelming and Britain's reliance on the US would have added a final pressure.
@omsct The Palestine-Israel conflict is different again. Palestine and Iraq were mandated to Britain after the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire (at the end of WW1 on behalf of the League of Nations). The purpose of the mandates was to control the territories until they were in a suitable position for independence. Independence was the long-term aim from the beginning. Sympathy for the Jews in WW2 meant the allies promised them a 'home' and the obvious choice was their original...
@omsct There was a large influx of Jewish refugees into Israel at this time (mostly from Europe) and a new Jewish national sense of identity was born. Very soon fighting broke out between Muslims and Jews within the Palestinian mandate (it is worth noting that Palestine was never an independent country and that in WW2 the Grand Mufti supported Hitler), the British troops were caught in the middle and tried to stop the fighting (failing miserably). Very soon things got so bad that we basically...
@omsct abandoned the place and left the two sides too it. It was a disaster but it was a disaster only partially of our making. Sorry for the extremely long explanation, history is complicated!
As for a limited amount of government intervention in the Japanese, West German, South Korean style yes it can work. But note the intervention here was mainly to give the industries a boost in their youth, very different to what we did in '46 and '47
@dartaddict Ha ha! A very sceptical position! Politicians didn't backtrack as much in 1945, and with the war over the Conservative Party would not have allowed Churchill to keep ID cards even if he had wanted to. It was "un-British"
@thebigJM92 BUT, Attlee got more votes than Churchill in 51, not to mention he won the 1950 election before. Saying that the public wanted Labour out is nonsense.
@ToaJoe Yes he did you are quite right, but only just. '50 and '51 were a massive climbdown from the euphoria of 1945. What would be your position on Edward Heath and the miners in '74 then? After all Heath won a higher share of the vote in his effort to defeat them but Labour won the election.
@thebigJM92 The situation with Heath and Wilson in '74 was nearly identical to the one with Attlee and Churchill. But Wilson is a legend. He made important changes to our society. A lot of the fairness in Britain today that we take for granted is from him. Legalizing homosexuality, bringing an end to capital punishment, reformed divorce laws, but most of all, he rid us of disgusting religious bullshit by legalizing abortion.
@ToaJoe In my opinion the single biggest policy success of Wilson was to keep us out of Vietnam. And indeed he achieved many social successes. But his consensual governing style and the economic policies of Old Labour played havoc with the competitiveness of Britain's economy that caused the crises of the '70s
@thebigJM92 Well he wasn't exactly anti-Vietnam, it was more his manipulative personality at work. Keeping the Americans happy by shipping in supplies, but keeping the British happy by not sending actual soliders to the war.
@ToaJoe Wilson was a fucking worthless cunt. Legalising sodomy, divorce and abortion was EVIL, but abolishing the death penalty was the worst thing that ever happened.
@thebigJM92 That's only half the story. Attlee beat Churchill the year before, in 1950, albeit with a reduced majority. Also, in 1951, Attlee got 250,000 more votes than Churchill nationwide, but fewer seats. The public backlash obviously didn't correspond to a worse electoral performance.
@thebigJM92 How do you mean? In terms of seats or in terms of votes? In 1951 he won 100 fewer seats than in 1945, but almost 2 million more votes. His percentage share of the vote was also higher (48.78%, compared with 47.88% in 1945).
@slimes23 No, but he won an election, which is more than can be said for our previous PM. And in fact by share of the electorate he smashed anything Tony Blair ever achieved.
When Churchill (at Beaverbrook's urging) accused Labour of having plans to establish a Gestapo, no one believed him. Attlee, Bevin, Morrison, and other Labour leaders had been doing a superb job as senior ministers in the wartime coalition. The public trusted them and were not fooled by Churchill's scare tactics.
One American observer asked how the British public could have had such short memories. In fact, the public had very long memories. They knew Churchill of old.
Labour's programme of post-war reconstruction, full employment, and social security had wide public appeal. One of the Party's most famous posters proclaimed, above a large "V" for victory sign, "Now Win the Peace." Churchill and the Tories were not to be trusted with that task. They were associated in the public mind with the Depression and the crushing of the General Strike of 1926 (in which Churchill played a leading role).
it wasn't about being "ungrateful" to Churchill. people did not want to go back to the situation between the wars with the Tories. It was the armed forces who voted Labour very heavily
0:24 Marr pinched the soundtrack to 'A Series of Unfortunate events'!
watch?v=ZCEMTmAfIWw
BasilFawlty4444 2 weeks ago
Winston Churchill governed more as a socialist in the 1950s when he came back to power than Tony Blair did with New Labour...
PsychoPunk1965 1 month ago
Ha ha yer fat Tory bastard yer lost the election heee heee hee
BRUTUALTRUTH 4 months ago
@BRUTUALTRUTH don't bother with him Tories in every country even mine (Australia) can never past the end of their own wallet or their own massive ego's for that matter.
irishgodfatherchris 3 months ago
@BRUTUALTRUTH You're seriously saying that about Churchill? The greatest Prime Minister in generations? You're a fool.
mcconvilleme 3 months ago
@mcconvilleme I was under the impression that the soldiers won the waf., That fat cigar chomping tosser did fuck all and CLEMENT ATLEE was hid deputy. Also he was wrong on India , wrong to oppose the wekfare state, wrong on rights for women.
Get a history lesson refresher yer fool!
BRUTUALTRUTH 3 months ago
@BRUTUALTRUTH Clement Atlee was nothing. He was a nobody as a Deputy and he was economically inept when he did take office.
He didn't oppose the welfare state - if he did, he would have reversed it when he got back in office. (But if he did oppose it, he wouldn't have been wrong).
You seem to be trying to attract attention with controversial views. He stopped the annoyingly large forces that wanted to cut a deal out of the war, and gave the country the morale that took us through.
mcconvilleme 3 months ago
@mcconvilleme You a typical Tory red neck or what? If that fat bastard was such a brillant leader why did the Britrish people fuck him out in thr 1945 election? When he retuned to power in 1951 he got a MILLION VOTES LESS than Labour thanks to the daft voting system.
The Tory Tosser also wanted to re-invade Ireland as the fat cunt was paranoid.
If you end up seriously injured an might die remembet that the care you receive in a NHS hospital was a Labour invention by Clement Atlee!
BRUTUALTRUTH 3 months ago
@BRUTUALTRUTH
PART 1
"red neck" is an Americanism - we don't really have them in England. But I'm not poor, so I'm certainly not a 'red neck'.
He was kicked out of office in 45 because he was terrible at the politics game. He was too complacent about the victory in WW2 and didn't bother with a campaign. He was the best crisis leader our country has ever had; but when there was no crisis, he had no idea what to do.
mcconvilleme 3 months ago
@BRUTUALTRUTH
PART 2
What Churchill did for our country goes beyond political boundaries, partisan divisions weren't relevant, that was the point of the national government. I think you need to stop being so strictly partisan about things, recognise that politicians on both sides of the house can do things well
If I ever ended up seriously injured, you couldn't pay me enter an NHS hospital - I don't like the thought of infection.
Plus, I believe it was Bevan who invented the NHS, not Clem.
mcconvilleme 3 months ago
@mcconvilleme Bevan and his Tory wankers thought of the idea and rubbished it
I see you fail to menton the 1945 election.
The idiot compatred Labour and Atlee to the gestapo depsite having them coalition partners
REMEMBER: dont wish what you want. If you get ill and the NHS saves your life - APOLOGIZE TO THEM
BRUTUALTRUTH 3 months ago
@BRUTUALTRUTH I did mention the 45 election. It was in the post with 'part 1' at the top of it. (It will be in the actual comments section)
Bevan was a Labour politician, he didn't conspire with any tories, and there weren't any who could be described as 'his'.
It will never be the NHS who saves my life - there are alternatives that are far better.
mcconvilleme 3 months ago
Comment removed
BRUTUALTRUTH 3 months ago
@mcconvilleme If you get injured in a car accident the NHS WILL SAVE YOUR LIFE! Remember that
BRUTUALTRUTH 3 months ago 4
@BRUTUALTRUTH i'm americna and sometimes i wish my family has stayed in alsace i'd say france but they are adament theyre germans i hate to tell them theyre french theyll have a stroke , the united states is now a nation of adolescent sociopaths a nation of drunken spoiled 15 years olds waving a gun in the worlds face..i'm ashamed of what we have become..we werent always this selfish
MrBillcale 3 months ago
@mcconvilleme If you get hit by a car, you get treated on the scene by an NHS Paramedic and taken to an NHS A&E unit.
Thank God for the NHS and Thank God for Attlee.
BasilFawlty4444 2 weeks ago
@RichardElden People like pipoo define the cancerous essence of Thatcherism, no regard or esteem for human life. Attlee's government realised monumental achievements. He will be long remembered....you won't
goitalone100 4 months ago
@RichardElden People like pipoo1 define the cancerous values espoused by Thatcher's government which has spread like rabies eating away at the fabric of society. Attlee's government made monumental achievements, giving dignity to people long disregarded by a privelaged Tory ruling class. He'll be long remembered....you won't....good riddance
goitalone100 4 months ago
People didn't have short memories in 1945 as they do now and didn't vote on personality rather than policy back then. Also Churchill was a good wartime leader but not very good domestically hence the big defeat. Also the conservative party at the time had caused alot of problems prior to 1939 with the economy and depression before it.
allyplumb 7 months ago
@allyplumb and the fact that he forcibly attained essentially a one party coalition and suspended the elections, hell even as Japan was bombing us here in Australia we still held elections as a matter of fact we held 2 during the war one resulting in a hung parliament and the other a landslide where Labor had more than 2/3 of the house under their control
irishgodfatherchris 7 months ago
@RichardElden thats not only incredibly stupid, it would bankrupt the UK and you'd be faced with a healthcare crisis, you are like most right-wingers, willing to privatise most major industries and sack the public service which is great for making a small amount of money fast but it will in the long run not work.
irishgodfatherchris 8 months ago
@RichardElden the welfare state exists for a reason, without it the country would be bankrupted because the health system would collapse, the education system would be rendered useless. The UK needed this in 1945, we've had an adequate welfare state here since Federation without it disease would've killed more people than it did, my country probably would've descended in civil war, it exists for a reason no matter how much you hate it.
irishgodfatherchris 8 months ago
@RichardElden Open to debate. He certainly knew how to end the Cold War. However I doubt he could stand in todays Republican Party. Federal Spending under his tenure increased at unprecedented levels.
pipoo1 8 months ago
@RichardElden Mrs Thatcher held him in the very highest regard. Of all the Prime Ministers we ever had only two ever left the nation better off than they found it. Attlee and Thatcher, and oddly enough they are the two that top the surveys on this question.
pipoo1 8 months ago
One of the most curious things about Churchill is that he NEVER won the popular vote at any General Election. Attlee beat him all three times including 1951 but the electoral system at that time worked against the Labour Party.
pipoo1 9 months ago
I don't think that 1945 was a defeat for Churchill but more for his party. A lot of people by 1945 held the Conservative party in contempt for their inability to deal with the depression, appeasing Hitler and leaving Britain unprepared on the brink of war. Churchill to his credit opposed appeasement but he paid for it at the ballot box. The Conservatives have a shameful record in basically not giving a toss for ordinary people in this country. This is as true today as in 1945!
densaner77 9 months ago
@densaner77 If you think you have it bad there in the UK, you haven't heard of the "Conservatives" we have here in the US. At least you guys have NHS, in the US, if you are poor and get sick, you die in the gutter.
The Republican ("Conservative") Party here in the US is basically a neo-fascist party that has completely handed control of our government to corporations, over the past 30 years.
llar87 9 months ago
@llar87. On the contrary I am well aware of the so called "Grand Old Party". You are correct that the GOP is a neo-fascist party. The Republicans are by far the most right wing party to hold office and in any western democracy. They must have a factory somewhere for the endless production of nutcases they have to speak for them. From nuts like Bachmann or Beck to other nuts like Palin to that meganut Coulter. I hate the Conservatives in my country but they are not as right wing as the GOP.
densaner77 9 months ago
@RichardElden To George this was his chance to make his cousin look like and idiot if he really believed in the war he should've been on the frontline fighting himself, but no millions of men died for what was at times 15 yards of land.
irishgodfatherchris 10 months ago
@RichardElden got a question for you did Haig ever inspect the trenches and conditions for himself or did he true to form never leave his office in London, Monash visited our frontline troops on several occasions the first time it reduced him to tears, he even considered asking Prime Minister Hughes to withdraw the troops but he changed his mind after weighing up his influence (Gen. Monash was Jewish and so lost a lot of influence purely based on that)
irishgodfatherchris 10 months ago
@RichardElden 100,000 men dead is a huge total for a country with a population of 2.5 million. The British Army losing 58,000 men just shows how inept the leadership was and so later we were sent in as cannon fodder whilst the war stagnated.
irishgodfatherchris 10 months ago
@RichardElden how was it alright 10 million died essentially for nothing Germany lost some land, Austria-Hungary dissolved but that was it, Australia a country that should've been nowhere near the fighting lost over 100,000 men.
irishgodfatherchris 10 months ago
@irishgodfatherchris You don't know the full repercussions of the First World War. The old German Empire was splintered as you mentioned and a Republic created. Many new countries were created in Eastern Europe. The old Austro-Hungarian Empire (oldest in Europe) was toppled and split. The Ottoman Empire collapsed and the Middle-East splintered. Japan gained lots of ground in Asia, German overseas territories were parcelled out, Britain and France were weakened. The USSR was created etc etc...
thebigJM92 9 months ago
@irishgodfatherchris Most of the results were bad, but they can only be under-estimated at your peril. The result of the war was to change the course of world history, for the worse.
thebigJM92 9 months ago
@thebigJM92 I'm not arguing in favour of war, I'm having a go at the tory that you see above you, who claimed that the war was a good thing because Britain came out of it still a super-power, whilst over 10,000,000 as I said fought for was at times about 15 yards of land
irishgodfatherchris 9 months ago
@RichardElden once again that was Churchill's fault the man could not organise a piss-up in a pub let alone a military campaign, who the hell organises an invasion where the enemy knows your coming and already have the high-ground, medieval tacticians knew this why not Churchill. Churchill resigned because of the monumental failure of this campaign.
irishgodfatherchris 10 months ago
@RichardElden Churchill sent thousands of my countries men to die for no reason, hell this man was so delusional that he tried to re-enact the story of the 300 Spartans and replaced them with 300 Australians every single one of those men we slaughtered because the British didn't think we were worth saving nor did they think the island were were defending was worth it either
irishgodfatherchris 10 months ago
@RichardElden I guess your a rich toff ?
ThePAULOPABLO 11 months ago
Sad news. From Atlee forward, the UK declined until Thatcher reversed that somewhat.
NickB1967 1 year ago
@NickB1967 What by helping sell the UK off to the rest of the world so we have to rely on Japan and chinese firms for jobs. She also helped us into Europe thanks a bunch.
ThePAULOPABLO 11 months ago
@ThePAULOPABLO: As opposed to working for lame nationalised firms that produced crappy goods that no one wanted? Moreover, she was a Euroskeptic and refused to adopt the Euro. Joining the EEC came before her in 1973.
NickB1967 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RichardElden I'm not going to talk to you unless you demonstrate historical knowledge. By saying Churchill would have preserved our empire, you are proving to me that you know jack shit about post war Britain.
In fact, I think you'll continue like you did on your other account and just post stupid shit instead of actually thinking of factual arguments.
ToaJoe 1 year ago
@RichardElden You clearly know very little about the situation. Do you honestly think that if Churchill had won in '45, we would still have an empire? That demonstrates your utter stupidity and lack of economic knowledge.
ToaJoe 1 year ago
@RichardElden Why bother changing accounts, JuanMacready?
See, unlike the right wingers, I don't wish death or cancer on anyone, even a useless PM like Thatcher who ruined our country.
ToaJoe 1 year ago
chant = "we want ..."????
Marnerbanana 1 year ago
@Marnerbanana Labour but they would soon regret it
ImPoliticalOK 1 year ago
@ImPoliticalOK
yeah getting access to healthcare housing and education can really get you down and make you wish for the good old days of no socialised services save for the police and army...
Marnerbanana 1 year ago
@Marnerbanana NHS and Education yes but labour never can seem to improve or defend them when they are in as of housing labour should have let private enterprise come in
ImPoliticalOK 1 year ago
@ImPoliticalOK So why did Labour win two elections and even when they were beaten by the Tories in 1951 they still got more of the public vote?
ToaJoe 1 year ago
@ToaJoe Because thats how the vote is done the lib Dems got 5,999,384 votes yet went down 2 seats in 1997 they got 5,242,947 yet they were up 28 seats its just politics in this country crazy results every time
Thatcher 1979
13,697,923 339 seats up 62
1983
13,012,316 387 seats up 58
And the AV votes system its funny that labour supported it yet never had a referendum now support it because labour and the Lib Dem Respectfully would get more seats but would leave the BNP to gain
ImPoliticalOK 1 year ago
@ImPoliticalOK Doesn't matter. Labour still got more votes, therefore they should have won. And yes, I agree the conservatives should have won in that election in the 60's, too.
AV is a terrible idea. Not all of labour support it, actually. Certain key figures are opposed to it, and vice versa.
ToaJoe 1 year ago
@ToaJoe Attlee was the worst thing that ever happened to the UK.
JuanMacready 1 year ago
@ToaJoe Yep AV will cripple the election system
ImPoliticalOK 1 year ago
@ImPoliticalOK well it could do one of two things it could consolidate the Lib Dems or it could kill them because what it would force the minor parties and indeed the major parties as well it would force them to preference other candidates on the sheet for example in my seat Labor preference the Greens, then the Socialist Alliance, then Family First, then the Liberals (Conservatives). All it does is makes sure a candidate has an absolute majority in their constituency.
irishgodfatherchris 1 year ago
@ToaJoe Also people where fed up of Labour they wanted happier times of low tax and Proper Education in schools and a sensible house building program after the war
ImPoliticalOK 1 year ago
Clement- the best war leader.
Attlee- the best PM.
ToaJoe 1 year ago
The British people went into STUPID mode in 1945 and destroyed the UK.
JuanMacready 1 year ago
@JuanMacready We wouldn't have been any better under any other party. If Churchill had been voted in, we'd have had to fight a war with India to retain that, which would have put us further in the red. The war would have taken years and we wouldn't have been able to afford it, and would end up conceding India anyway. We'd have fought wars all over the world to retain useless colonies, just like we did under Attlee anyway, and Churchill when he came back in 1951. Nothing would have differed.
omsct 1 year ago
I can't believe he was heckled! What an absolute disgrace!!!!!
At least The Royal Family stood by him after the war.
mendal05 1 year ago
hecklers of Churchill should be shot
SirOneoneselfandone 1 year ago 2
2010 and nothing has changed...the public schoolboys still run the country.
BillDFC 1 year ago 3
@BillDFC Neither Thatcher or Major went to public school. Blair however, did, and Brown was just as much a member of the Scottish aristocracy as Cameron is part of the English upper classes. If you want a reason for a decline in social mobility in this country and the hegemony of the privileged within public life than look no further than the socialist Labour policy of destroying the grammar schools and replacing them with poorly performing comprehensives.
UnitedBritannia 1 year ago
@UnitedBritannia Although I agree with your general sentiment, its stretching a point to call Brown "Scottish aristocracy". He was a very bright child who was fast-tracked into Edinburgh University, that's all. In fact, his education was more typical of a grammar school type system - he was identified at an early age (like the 11 plus), put in a hothouse environment (like a grammar school) and went onto a prestigious university.
jmorrison230582 1 year ago
@UnitedBritannia labour was hardly socialist during the blairite years
arsenalmanz 1 year ago
@UnitedBritannia Prove to me Brown came from the same privaliged unbringing as Cameron. Please, prove it. Because you're wrong.
ToaJoe 1 year ago
@ToaJoe But swings and roundabouts, you can't pick and choose. Blair had a more privileged upbringing than Thatcher. The privileged upbringing thing doesn't really hold water for the Labour party when Ed Miliband comes from an upper-middle class family with a father from the academic elite!
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@ToaJoe And as for the premise that in 1951 Labour should have won the general election but were stopped by the electoral system (ie they lost) it can quite as easily be said that in 2010 the Conservatives should have won an absolute majority in the general election. Because lets not forget that the Tories are now having to share power when they got 37% of the vote, whereas in 2005 the Labour party won a good absolute majority with just 36% of the vote!
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@UnitedBritannia thats not quite true Thatcher attended Kesteven and Grantham Girls' School (after being awarded a scholarship and Major attended Rutlish Grammar School for one year.
irishgodfatherchris 1 year ago
@UnitedBritannia That makes no sense. Post-war Labour tried to move Britain towards becoming a classless society. Socialism, by its very nature, seeks to create equality. Hegemony only occurs when there is a ruling class to instigate it.
DexterAndCromwell 9 months ago
@BillDFC so what, if they are better at running a country whats wrong with them
SirOneoneselfandone 1 year ago
@SirOneoneselfandone They are not though are they? They are all the bloody same.
BillDFC 1 year ago
@BillDFC Of course they are.
JuanMacready 1 year ago
The Labour Party has always been a party of toffs. Tony Benn, Michael Foot, Dick Crossman, Hugh Gaitskill, Clem Attlee, Tony Blair etc all went to private schools and Oxford.
The Tories however elected in David Cameron their first toff since Alec Douglas Home. Heath, Thatcher, Major, Hague, Smith and Howard all went to state schools.
VonMises1990 1 year ago
attlees first labour government-nearly bankrupted the nation, by 18951 20% of industry was state owned, the id card was introduced.
fericitchannel 1 year ago
The British people went into stupid mode in 1945 and have been paying for it ever since.
JuanMacready 1 year ago
Churchill = Zionist Warmonger
Look at your country now British people. A colony for blacks and muslim.
Mittsommer1 1 year ago
@Mittsommer1 4% Asian. 2% Black. Facts are always free from the right-wing.
PrimaIScream 1 year ago
Typical socialists
AVFCGoodieMK 1 year ago
The election defeat had more to do with the fact that the Tories had been in power for a very long time, and many people had major problems with some of the stuff they did before the war. It wasn't really as much a judgement on Churchill as his approval rating after the war was sky high. We elect parties in this country, not Prime Minsters.
MrDragon1968 1 year ago
I'm Labour for life, but this video is a sorry example of how ill-informed and childish the British voters can be. British thinking: "We've had some bad times...it's obviously all Churchill's fault...Let's get rid of him."
It's funny, I was thinking about this event earlier today before I saw this.
It's making me worry about the fate of this election.
IronbreakerFTW 1 year ago 2
@IronbreakerFTW Labour for life? You Socialist loser.
miamad 1 year ago
@miamad Fuck off you elitest cunt. Go and die a death.
IronbreakerFTW 1 year ago
@IronbreakerFTW Elitist? You call working hard for what I have, elitist? You lazy, worthless, take care of me government, waste of space, loser.
miamad 1 year ago
@miamad You don't know a fucking thing about me. Say that to my face and I'll cut your fucking throat. I work very hard ...but I am not a pretentious well-to-do arse hole like all of you southern cunts. I have the sense, unlike you, to realise not all people are poor because they don't work hard. What about single mothers?
A tip: Taking your head out of your rectum may help you notice things like this.
Fucking selfish arse hole.
IronbreakerFTW 1 year ago
@IronbreakerFTW You want everything to be given to you on a silver platter. There will always be poor people, you fooking leach.
miamad 1 year ago
@IronbreakerFTW you know this has just happened here in my state, the opposition led by a man who has no clue as to how to run a political party managed an unlikely 5.96% swing and gained 13 seats to hold a two seat majority (45 to 43) purely because the public wanted change not because the Government was doing a bad job.
irishgodfatherchris 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Jack Straw = JEW
David Cameron = JEW
David Milliband = JEW
Nick Cleg = REUSSIAN JEW (real name - zekevsk or soemthing like that)
Borsi YELTZIN = JEW (he's called bloody YELTZIN, for fcks sake)
I found all this out, in 10 minutes by googling them - come on you ignorant bstds, wake up ! ONLY Nick Griffin is NOT a Jew !!!!!
AnnoyingTypoSyndrome 1 year ago
@AnnoyingTypoSyndrome Absolute bullshit. Nick Clegg is not a jew, in fact he has been criticised by jewish groups for his anti-israeli views!!
Xenzod 1 year ago
I'm not judging the British people, right or wrong I can't say, it just seems strange to vote out Churchill right after a major war victory.
bigfilmhat 1 year ago
@bigfilmhat Yes it was odd wasn't it? Usually a good war victory is prime fodder for an incumbent PM facing re-election. Thatcher put her's to good use. In 1945 things were different; the war had exacted a terrible price from Britain in human as well as economic terms, we were basically bankrupt and many families had been shattered. People also have longer memories than politicians suppose and they remembered what happened after the Great War. I suppose people thought what was this all for?
sonofcy 1 year ago
@sonofcy The country was ruined, industry devastated and a Million men were about to return home to what? I think that they thought it was time for a change, that they had earned it in blood, sweat and tears. Also Churchill was not as popular a figure in all of the country as you might think by reading the history books. Before the war in many parts that suffered in the Depression he was disliked and in some places despised.
sonofcy 1 year ago
Comment removed
sonofcy 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Going to war in 1939 was a big mistake, but electing a cunt like Attlee in 1945 was FAR worse.
JuanMacready 1 year ago
Clement Atlee was originally a Conservative but changed his views when working in a poor part of London. He saw the harsh conditions and wanted to change them. Unlike many politician's today he was a conviction politician who just wanted to help people.
ThePAULOPABLO 1 year ago 11
Churchill and Atlee were two of the greatest PM ever.
ThePAULOPABLO 1 year ago 7
They were both great men.. and right for their time....
Kevinasp 1 year ago
Churchill did not lose the election. The main reasons the Conservatives were widely hated in 1945 were not really his fault. The twin evils of Appeasement (he opposed it) and reaction to the great depression (he wasn't in power) . I am glad we had Churchill to lead us through the war as he played a major part in the Victory. I am glad we had Attlee who led the country through the difficult post war years. The Conservatives lost the election in 1945 not Churchill and I for one am glad they did!
densaner77 1 year ago 3
Yeah, compare Churchill and Attlee with Cameron and Brown!!!!
Kevinasp 1 year ago
Attlee should have stood down after the 1951 defeat... and maybe Churchill a year or so after gaining power.. because both were past their best by then.... in age and health.. but as I say, Churchill was the right man to be in power in 1940 and throughout the war... Chamberlain couldn't have inspired us like he did... and Attlee was the right man from 1945 onwards... both great leaders but suited for different times and climates...
Kevinasp 1 year ago
Comment removed
Kevinasp 2 years ago
Churchill was the man for the war, 1940-1945... Attlee was the man for the peace, 1945-51....
Kevinasp 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Electing the useless cunt Attlee was the worst thing we ever did, turning this once-great country into a socialist welfare cunthole.
FrankClanton 1 year ago
Everybody thought Churchill was going to win... Attlee himself probably did... the reason why he lost was memory of mass unemployment and poverty of the 1930's, the means test, the poor state of many soldiers when the war started, the war brought together people from different social classes together for the first time, public memory of how they were cheated after World War I, Munich and appeasement. He was popular in 1945, but his party wasn't.
Kevinasp 2 years ago 2
This government gave us the NHS, full employment, got the country going again after World War II, because it was basically bankrupt, University grants, free school milk for children.... of course Attlee didn't get everything right. but for me, he was the greatest peacetime Prime Minister of the 20th Century...
Kevinasp 2 years ago
Clement Atlee was the greatest Prime Minister of all time I think. You can't beat a record that basically says "I created the NHS!"
binstig 2 years ago 5
Americans usually don't understand the parliamentary political system in the UK. We elect Parties not Prime Ministers. That was part of the reason for Churchill leaving office at that time. Mind you, nowadays it's looking more and more like we are 'electing' Prime Ministers.
MrDragon1968 2 years ago
churchill got his own back in 1951!!! conservative rule 1951-1964 :) conservatives have been in power more
DrGustil 2 years ago
Well, in 1951 the Labour Party actually had more votes than the Conservatives, but the Conservatives gained more new seats.
Though a bit different, the same thing happened in America in 2000 where Al Gore had more votes than Bush but Bush still won.
Churchill was still a great man though. He was what U.K. needed during the war, and Attlee was what U.K. needed to progress forward as a nation (health-care). Both great.
Sadly todays labour and conservatives are far from attlee and churchill
andyx1205 2 years ago 5
Very true...
Kevinasp 2 years ago
I'm not commenting that his defeat was good or bad. It just seems so unlikely that a Prime Minister or President with such a historic victory in war then gets bent over just months later.
bigfilmhat 2 years ago 3
winston churchill was one greatest men in history,
youknowimright1 2 years ago 8
We want the what?
omsct 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
He is best known for taking a begging bowl to the USA refusing Hitler's offer of peace. Overrated.... Overwieght ...Over now!
truthwillout1000 2 years ago
"He'd just fought on of the few really bad campaigns of his life..."
He never won the popular vote in a general election. Whether he was any good as a politician is open to question.
SERVANTOFSET 2 years ago
If only we Americans could have had similar courage in 2004...
freedom8758 2 years ago 2
Churchill had introduced the ID card during the war for safety reasons but promised to scrap them when the war ended. Unfortunately Labour won before the war had ended against Japan so they decided that instead of phasing out ID cards they were going to hugely increase the amount of information on them and they did. So bad did the public backlash against this authoritarianism become that the government was taken to court and was forced to back down and give up. Attlee lost to Churchill in '51
thebigJM92 2 years ago 13
@thebigJM92 to be clear, attllee did NOT lose the popular vote to Churchill in '51, the rigged non-proportional system allowed Churchill to win because of the greater amount of seats.
Btw, Attlee gave you Brits NHS so you should respect him a bit more.
andyx1205 1 year ago
@andyx1205 NHS was the one redeeming feature of his 6 years in power. How about his massive nationalisation programme leading to the economic crises that almost destroyed the economy and certainly accelerated its decline in the 60s and 70s?
Oh and in 1974 the Conservatives won more votes and Labour more seats so Labour formed the goverrnment, its swings and roundabouts. Still now it is weighted to the Labour Parties advantage (if both won the same number of votes Labour would win easy)
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 If it weren't for the introduction of NHS, Great Britain today may have been like the shithole America, a small middle class with a very rich elite. You would have had no social safety net and Brits would be seen as a joke by Europeans that do have universal health-care just as how America is seen as a joke when just across their border Canadians live to be much longer and have more money in their pockets because of low priced health-care.
andyx1205 1 year ago
@andyx1205 It's obvious you feel very strongly about the issue of healthcare but i will point something out to you. After the budget for the whole welfare department (including pensions as well as benefits) the spending on the NHS is the biggest use of government funds in the country. Between 15 and 20% of the budget is spent on the NHS. Personally i don't have a problem with that, i like the NHS, but if the US was to follow that plan there would have to be DRASTIC reductions elsewhere.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@andyx1205 And if Clement Attlee himself hadn't introduced the NHS one of his Labour successors in the 1960s definitely would have done. It doesn't change the fact that he implemented the economic policies that would lead the country to the very edge of destruction and made Britain a laughing stock.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 Talking about nationisation or other policies?
omsct 1 year ago
@omsct Churchill wouldn't have fought a war over India. His Cabinet, not to mention Parliament, wouldn't have let him. Britain did not run its empire like France. Don't forget it had already given India some power over its own domestic policy and had point blank PROMISED them independence. Churchill might have dragged his feet for a few years but it is clear from his Iron Curtain speech that by 1946 his main concern was Europe and the USSR.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@omsct The greatest figure in the Labour Party in the time of Attlee was Ernest Bevin, the Foreign Secretary. It was mainly thanks to his persuasion that the reluctant US agreed to set up NATO for example. In fact considering the disastrous position Britain found itself in in 1945 I think it was remarkably well handled over the next 20 years. Withdrawing from 20% of the world is no easy task when you are bankrupt, battered and thinking on your feet.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 Bevin was a cunt. So glad he died of cancer.
JuanMacready 1 year ago
@omsct But yes i was talking about the nationalisation. Nationalisation CAN work, but only as a temporary measure. Long term nationalisation of industry WILL lead to its decline. Look at the Soviet Union. In the short term it led to a vast expansion, in the long-term it led to economic collapse. Such was happening in Britain within 30 years. 83% tax rate? You would have to be mad to pay that.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 But we fought other wars all around. I appreciate that Kenya is a different case to India, and I don't understand the Palestine-Israel conflict well enough to comment, but we fought a war in Malaya for 12 years, and I'm pretty sure that India would have posed some kind of problem.
What about a limited amount of government intervention in industry - like South Korea, Japan, West Germany, and France. Some of a country's biggest companies are built up by being protected by government
omsct 1 year ago
@omsct Yes we fought many small wars in Empire territory but they were not wars in which Britain was aiming to hold on to the territory indefinately. In Kenya and Malaya Britain did intend to give these places independence, however it wanted to set up competent governments before it left. India's system in 1947 was far more advanced than other parts of our empire, with an efficient civil service and democratic system put in place by the Raj. We were trying to do the same in the other territories
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@omsct The nationalists fighting for independence in (say) Kenya didn't accept this as an excuse for waiting for independence so they fought for it and sped up the process. When we left we hadn't achieved the nation building position we wanted. India WOULD have gained its independence before 1950 even if Churchill was PM-costs would have been too high, demands for independence too overwhelming and Britain's reliance on the US would have added a final pressure.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@omsct The Palestine-Israel conflict is different again. Palestine and Iraq were mandated to Britain after the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire (at the end of WW1 on behalf of the League of Nations). The purpose of the mandates was to control the territories until they were in a suitable position for independence. Independence was the long-term aim from the beginning. Sympathy for the Jews in WW2 meant the allies promised them a 'home' and the obvious choice was their original...
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@omsct There was a large influx of Jewish refugees into Israel at this time (mostly from Europe) and a new Jewish national sense of identity was born. Very soon fighting broke out between Muslims and Jews within the Palestinian mandate (it is worth noting that Palestine was never an independent country and that in WW2 the Grand Mufti supported Hitler), the British troops were caught in the middle and tried to stop the fighting (failing miserably). Very soon things got so bad that we basically...
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@omsct abandoned the place and left the two sides too it. It was a disaster but it was a disaster only partially of our making. Sorry for the extremely long explanation, history is complicated!
As for a limited amount of government intervention in the Japanese, West German, South Korean style yes it can work. But note the intervention here was mainly to give the industries a boost in their youth, very different to what we did in '46 and '47
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92
I'm sure he would have done, because politicians always keep thier promises!
dartaddict 1 year ago
@dartaddict Ha ha! A very sceptical position! Politicians didn't backtrack as much in 1945, and with the war over the Conservative Party would not have allowed Churchill to keep ID cards even if he had wanted to. It was "un-British"
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 BUT, Attlee got more votes than Churchill in 51, not to mention he won the 1950 election before. Saying that the public wanted Labour out is nonsense.
ToaJoe 1 year ago
@ToaJoe Yes he did you are quite right, but only just. '50 and '51 were a massive climbdown from the euphoria of 1945. What would be your position on Edward Heath and the miners in '74 then? After all Heath won a higher share of the vote in his effort to defeat them but Labour won the election.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 The situation with Heath and Wilson in '74 was nearly identical to the one with Attlee and Churchill. But Wilson is a legend. He made important changes to our society. A lot of the fairness in Britain today that we take for granted is from him. Legalizing homosexuality, bringing an end to capital punishment, reformed divorce laws, but most of all, he rid us of disgusting religious bullshit by legalizing abortion.
ToaJoe 1 year ago
@ToaJoe In my opinion the single biggest policy success of Wilson was to keep us out of Vietnam. And indeed he achieved many social successes. But his consensual governing style and the economic policies of Old Labour played havoc with the competitiveness of Britain's economy that caused the crises of the '70s
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 Well he wasn't exactly anti-Vietnam, it was more his manipulative personality at work. Keeping the Americans happy by shipping in supplies, but keeping the British happy by not sending actual soliders to the war.
ToaJoe 1 year ago
@ToaJoe Indeed. And i can only applaude him for it. A brilliant piece of pragmatic realism!
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 It certainly displays some intelligence.
ToaJoe 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 We should have joined the Vietnam War.
JuanMacready 1 year ago
@JuanMacready Are you religious? If you are, I have instantly won the argument because you are utterly unintelligent.
ToaJoe 1 year ago
@ToaJoe No, not really.
JuanMacready 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JuanMacready So why do you think abortion is bad?
ToaJoe 1 year ago
@JuanMacready So why do you think it's wrong for women to have abortions?
You're not for real, are you. Congratulations for fooling me into thinking you were serious for this amount of time.
ToaJoe 1 year ago
@ToaJoe That evil decade the 1960s was where everything started to go wrong.
JuanMacready 1 year ago
@ToaJoe Wilson was a fucking worthless cunt. Legalising sodomy, divorce and abortion was EVIL, but abolishing the death penalty was the worst thing that ever happened.
So glad Wilson had cancer AND Alzheimer's!
JuanMacready 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 That's only half the story. Attlee beat Churchill the year before, in 1950, albeit with a reduced majority. Also, in 1951, Attlee got 250,000 more votes than Churchill nationwide, but fewer seats. The public backlash obviously didn't correspond to a worse electoral performance.
GreatDefenestrator 1 year ago
@GreatDefenestrator His result was far far lower than the landslide he won in '45 however.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 How do you mean? In terms of seats or in terms of votes? In 1951 he won 100 fewer seats than in 1945, but almost 2 million more votes. His percentage share of the vote was also higher (48.78%, compared with 47.88% in 1945).
GreatDefenestrator 1 year ago
@GreatDefenestrator Seats. Although that is an interesting point you make.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 Churchill never won the popular vote.
slimes23 1 year ago
@slimes23 No, but he won an election, which is more than can be said for our previous PM. And in fact by share of the electorate he smashed anything Tony Blair ever achieved.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 They lost in '51, but they won more votes.
So if you're trying to argue that the country rejected Labour, you're utterly wrong.
ToaJoe 1 year ago
When Churchill (at Beaverbrook's urging) accused Labour of having plans to establish a Gestapo, no one believed him. Attlee, Bevin, Morrison, and other Labour leaders had been doing a superb job as senior ministers in the wartime coalition. The public trusted them and were not fooled by Churchill's scare tactics.
One American observer asked how the British public could have had such short memories. In fact, the public had very long memories. They knew Churchill of old.
StephenHP62 2 years ago 5
Labour's programme of post-war reconstruction, full employment, and social security had wide public appeal. One of the Party's most famous posters proclaimed, above a large "V" for victory sign, "Now Win the Peace." Churchill and the Tories were not to be trusted with that task. They were associated in the public mind with the Depression and the crushing of the General Strike of 1926 (in which Churchill played a leading role).
StephenHP62 2 years ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Next election is going to be a real shocker too when BNP win.
EarnestBergholt 2 years ago
Mopsius below trying to equate concentration camps to extermination camps eh? Classy.
You know once the British knew there was disease in the camps the people there had better medical care than those in Glasgow did.
madbob73 2 years ago
what is that music that starts at 0:28? I've heard it before. Is it classical?
vzbyrne 2 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The British invented concentration camps in the Boer War (read Kitchener in the archives on genocide).
The British used chemical weapons on the Kurds in the 1920's and 1930's and called it "terrorism".
Churchill was all for both (documents exist).
Churchill also wrote an essay phrasing Hitler.
Churchill sold out Singapore deliberately.
Churchill was behind Dresden.
Poetic justice--Churchill also was the single most responsible incompetent behind ending the British Empire, haha.
mopsius 2 years ago
corr: "praising Hitler"
mopsius 2 years ago
Comment removed
dankya58 2 years ago
it wasn't about being "ungrateful" to Churchill. people did not want to go back to the situation between the wars with the Tories. It was the armed forces who voted Labour very heavily
bripat22 2 years ago 2
I can understand voting Churchill out after the war....that's fair.... But heckling him?
Reazzurro90 2 years ago 26
What was the crowd shouting at 2:15 to 2:20?
msynman 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think it was "we want him out".
NaMgKCa 2 years ago
We want Labour. They defeneately didn't have a clue what they were on about...
autofreak7 2 years ago 7
They are shouting "We Want Labour!".
UnitedBritannia 2 years ago
@UnitedBritannia Yes because labour will always be better then conservatives and lib dems
lukespencer91 1 year ago
@msynman we want Hitler.
LOL.
Iron1023